Thursday, 28 January 2010

Alignments in Castles and Crusades

Its common knowledge that (with a few adjustments LoL) Castles & Crusades is my system of choice.

Its quick, clean playing, and fun - and for the most part has gotten things 'right' (for me at least).

However, there are a couple of things I don't like - the biggest 'bugbear' being the alignments available to certain classes.

Fighters can be of any Alignment, which makes perfect sense - every army, clan, or tribe whether good or evil needs its Fighters - no argument there from me.

Then with Rangers, it breaks down a little. Rangers to my mind should be good aligned, look at Ranger-Types from Literature and Legend - Aragorn and Robin Hood (though the latter is a little rogue-ish) were both Good and the Ranger class should be no different. They should be restricted to Good Alignments only IMHO.

Rogues (why oh why can't they be called Thieves, this post-modern PC naming of things REALLY gets my Goat - I might design a Rogue class, a hybrid Class that cherry picks its areas of expertise), like I said THIEVES for some reason can be of ANY Alignment - WTF, ANY -SERIOUSLY! Thieves/Rogues should be restricted in some way, surely a Lawful Good Thief/Rogue is not only ridiculous its a contradiction! So, Thieves/Rogues can be any Alignment except Lawful Good.

Assasins are restricted to any non-Good Alignment. Now this is spot on, I have always allowed Neutral Assassins - those who consider themselves to be "just doing a job" with no Evil or Malice in what they are doing - Assassin Alignments stay 'as-is'.

Barbarians are also "Any" - SERIOUSLY LoL! The idea of a Lawful Barbarian seems Daft to me, mind you my Favourite Barbarian is Thongor - and Lawful he ain't! So, Barbarians can be any non-Lawful Alignment.

Monks are also Any, there seems to be a pattern here - like the writers are trying to break down the barriers between the Classes. One of the strengths of a Class/Level based system is it gives players (and Dm's/CK's) a good grasp of the way a game world works. Its strengths and weaknesses - and where everybody 'stands' in relation to the world at large. By levying these restrictions a milieu can rapidly degenerate into Chaos creating a lot more work for the DM/CK in the long run. Monks should be restricted to Lawful Alignments only IMHO, this represents thier strong and discplined nature and sets them apart from the other Classes.

Wizards, Clerics, & Illusionists - Any, again like the Fighter - makes perfect sense.

Druids are now any Neutral Alignment. Knowing a little about Historical Druids, and Druidic Characters and Cults in Fantasy Literature - this makes perfect sense. There would be those who lean towards Good just as those who used their powers for Evil.

Knights are allowed any Alignment too, whilst I understand the need for such Evil Knightly characters as NPC's I think they should be restricted to NPC's. In addition to this, how could you have a Chaotic Neutral Knight - he would be incapable, by the sheer nature of his Alignment - of following the Knightly Code. Its illogical IMHO. So Player Character Knights should be restricted to any non-Evil Alignment, and Chaotic Neutral should be off limits as well.

Paladins remain restricted to Lawful Good, so everythings fine there.

Bards - Once again any, like the Fighter - again this makes perfect sense.

Ok, Rant over LoL!

No comments:

Post a Comment